Devi Lal Gujar, Proprietor vs. State Of Rajasthan

Facts

The petitioner, Devi Lal Gujar, proprietor of Gurukripa Enterprises, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court. The respondents included the State of Rajasthan and the Union of India. The petition was filed challenging an order or action by the revenue authorities, though the specific order and tax period are not detailed in the provided text. The core of the matter revolves around the petitioner's right to appeal. The respondents' counsel submitted that the GST Tribunal has not yet been constituted, and the process is ongoing. They proposed disposing of the petition with protection under Section 112(8) of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, allowing the petitioner to file an appeal within a stipulated period after the Tribunal's constitution. The petitioner's counsel agreed to this arrangement.

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition with a specific direction. It held that if the petitioner makes the payment as stipulated under sub-section (8) of Section 112 of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, no further proceedings shall be initiated for the recovery of the balance amount. This relief is contingent upon the petitioner availing the statutory remedy of appeal within a period of three months from the date the GST Tribunal is constituted. The court accepted the respondents' submission that the Tribunal is not yet functional and that the petitioner should be allowed to pursue their statutory appeal once the Tribunal is in place, subject to compliance with the pre-deposit requirement under Section 112(8). The issue of the merits of the original challenge before the revenue authorities was not decided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the writ petition should be entertained and kept pending in light of the non-constitution of the GST Tribunal, or if it should be disposed of with liberty to file an appeal upon the Tribunal's constitution? The petitioner's side did not explicitly argue on this point as they agreed to the respondents' proposal. The respondents argued that the Tribunal is not yet constituted, and the process is ongoing. Therefore, they contended that the writ petition should not be kept pending. Instead, they proposed that the petition be disposed of with appropriate protection available under Section 112(8) of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. This would allow the petitioner to file an appeal within the stipulated period from the date the Tribunal is constituted. They relied on a circular dated 23.03.2020 issued by the Government of Rajasthan, Finance Department (Tax Division), in support of their submission.